Mail Archives: djgpp-workers/2000/12/15/20:57:35
At 11:31 AM 12/14/00 +0200, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
>On Wed, 13 Dec 2000, Peter J. Farley III wrote:
<Snipped>
>Perhaps. But I didn't want to add yet another cleanup job to what
you
>need to do ;-)
Oh, what the hey, what's one more.
>> Of course, if the definition of filelength insists on a long
>> result, wrong results can still be returned. If that's the case,
>> what about an "l" version of filelength (though "lfilelength" seems
a
>> bit of a cumbersome name, IMHO) which returns a long long?
>
>filelength is a compatibility function, so a variant for large files
>should follow name conventions on the platforms which have such a
>variant. Can someone look and suggest a name?
If no one can reply on this, and in order to get *something* done, I
will call the new version "lfilelength", which can always be changed
before the patch is committed. The fcntl code will use the new name,
and so will also have to be modified if the name needs to change.
But of course, a simple global edit on the patch file will fix that, if
needed.
BTW, I may or may not get another pass out before the Christmas holiday
is over, so don't think I've abandoned the job if you don't hear from
me for a bit.
---------------------------------------------------------
Peter J. Farley III (pjfarley AT dorsai DOT org OR
pjfarley AT banet DOT net)
- Raw text -